It’s Drumpf versus Clinton (but not as you think)
I think people are being premature in anointing Hillary the nominee, though sadly that’s not true for Drumpf. But as the ever-dumb Piers Morgan continues his life-mission to ingratiate himself with the most unpleasant people in the known universe. life goes on. Whether The Donald is a chummy-deal maker, a dangerous bigot, a narcissistic psychopath, or as Amanda Taub’s cute euphemism has it an expression of ‘American authoritarianism’, is up to you.
But it’s not all over for Bernie. First the Super Delegate system is overplayed. If Sanders wins the popular vote this will over-ride the super delegate system, and, despite Clinton seeming to win the ‘black vote’ (sic) (Alabama Goddam!), Oklahoma tells us something very different. Sanders was supposed to win Vermont, his home state but Oklahoma is a different matter. Clinton won the state in the 2008 primary and was 25 points ahead in mid January, yet yesterday lost it spectacularly to Sanders.
As Clare Malone wrote before Super Tuesday: “He appears to be appealing to the overwhelmingly white, middle to lower-middle class Democratic voters in Oklahoma in ways that he hasn’t been able to with minorities in other parts of the South (see: South Carolina). Eighty-two percent of Oklahoma’s 2008 Democratic primary voters were white and half had yearly household incomes between $30,000 and $75,000.” Keith Gaddie from University of Oklahoma argues this Sanders support is a return to the state’s historic political roots: “Oklahoma is where your Southern agrarian populism and Nebraska prairie populism collided in America.”
Sanders won Oklahoma with 51.9% of the vote to Clinton’s 41.5%. He won Colorado 58.9% to Clinton’s 40.4% and Minnesota by a 61.7% to 38.3%. This is why Sanders beats Trump, he can take him on on his home-turf.
For those fixated with the Democratic candidates gender, it’s sobering to read former Pennsylvania governor Ed Rendell’s look at the Hillary Democrats strategy as they face the challenge of Donald Trump: “For every one of those blue-collar Democrats he picks up, he will lose to Hillary two socially moderate Republicans and independents in suburban Cleveland, suburban Columbus, suburban Cincinnati, suburban Philadelphia, suburban Pittsburgh, places like that,” he said.
In other words, the Clinton tactic will be to scare moderate conservatives into voting for their candidate. They are going to appeal to the center-right. People have got this wrong. It’s not Rubio or Cruz versus Trump, they’re just the patsies. It’s Clinton who’s running against Trump for the Republican vote.
People hoped Sanders would swing Clinton to the left. That’s not what’s happened. Trump has swung her to the right, and the problem with corporate opportunists like Clinton is that they will swing a long way in the wind of a campaign.